It was the German sociologist Max Weber who first used the term “charismatic” to describe authority. Though many social scientists have since studied the concept, adding contributions to its evolution and understanding, the work of Weber, notably his book The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, has remained a standard reference in the domain of political leadership studies. The term charisma, as Weber refers to it, is “a certain quality of an individual personality by virtue of which he is considered extraordinary and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities.” Charismatic leaders have had a central position in history. Many charismatic leaders have led massive transformations within their respective societies. And some charismatic leaders have been the founding fathers of their states or even nations. Other scholars have pointed to the role of charismatic leaders in shaping the collective national consciousness, becoming a national icon and stirring up debates about their exact role in history, negative or positive, true or false, or imagined or genuine. In such debates it can be difficult to be objective or neutral. The various views that exist in Egypt today about head of the armed forces Abdel-Fattah Al-Sisi, ranging between mania and phobia, as revealed in Al-Ahram Weekly recently by Dina Ezzat, have to be seen within such a framework of public opinion and in terms of the sharp polarisation that exists about this emerging charismatic leader. Charismatic leaders have always caused such societal debates and divisions, and these have sometimes survived even the demise of such leaders. As a result, what we have been witnessing across the political spectrum today regarding Al-Sisi's candidacy for the presidency should be expected, and, more importantly, should be accepted. Popular as well as elitist attitudes towards such leaders have usually reflected magnetism of this sort, in other words, either attraction or repulsion. Emotionalism has characteristically always coloured diametrically opposing views of this type of leaders. Al-Sisi has been cited by some commentators as an example of a typical charismatic leader. He has been enjoying considerable admiration from broad societal sectors across Egypt. These sectors vary in their social background, age, gender and even political orientation. Perhaps the first time Al-Sisi emerged on the political scene was on 3 July last year when he announced the transitional roadmap. However, his emergence as a potential national saviour took place somewhat earlier. For months people had been explicitly demanding that the army intervene to put an end to the rule of ousted former president Mohamed Morsi. For various reasons, Al-Sisi refrained from showing any positive reaction to such rising popular demands. Not until late June 2013, when Al-Sisi started to express the army's commitment to safeguarding the security of the Egyptian people and their desire to see an end to Morsi's regime, did Al-Sisi make his feelings known. His speech in late June was overwhelmingly welcomed by Egyptians, who interpreted Al-Sisi's words of solidarity with the people as being an endorsement of their demand to see the ousting of Morsi. As a result, many Egyptians, including some latecomers and laggards, finally realised that they could count on the protection and support of the army and its leader in their desire to see the toppling of the Muslim Brotherhood regime. This development added more momentum to the mass movement and marked the emergence of Al-Sisi as a popular leader. Part of Al-Sisi's charisma emanated from the profound popularity of the army as an institution. This ingredient in Al-Sisi's popularity has been reflected in what can be described as a variant form of “office charisma,” which relates to the popular belief that certain officeholders by virtue of occupying an office acquire certain special powers or qualities. Examples of such office charisma are the leaders of the Roman Catholic Church and of the various Communist parties. However, some commentators have occasionally overlooked or even denied the Egyptians' deeply held faith in their army despite the polls that have pointed to its positive image. Evidence of the latter is provided by a US Pew Research Centre poll conducted in March 2013, which said that “since the revolution that toppled Hosni Mubarak two-and-a-half years ago, the armed forces have consistently been held in high regard by the Egyptian people. Fully 73 per cent of Egyptians said the military was having a good influence on the country, down somewhat from the 88 per cent registered in a 2011 survey conducted a few weeks after Mubarak was pushed out of office.” Apart from such polls, the popular support for the candidacies of the late Omar Suleiman and Ahmed Shafik in the last presidential elections in 2012 can be partially explained by such public trust in the army and its leaders. Yet, there has also been a sector within the political elite as well as within the youth that has held a negative view of the army and of its supposed role in Egyptian politics. This sector has been involved in rejecting any public role for the army, and it has definitely been against the candidacy of Al-Sisi despite the growing public endorsement of it. The mutual accusations between the two parties have become counter-productive to the development of a tolerant political environment in the country that accepts differences along ideological lines and does not embrace stereotyped perspectives. Such hostile attitudes from some politicians and intellectuals should not extend to tarnishing the army as a national institution or to offending the people who have already made their choice. It should be emphasised that Al-Sisi's popularity derives almost entirely from his role in ousting Morsi on 3 July last year. This role was valued by the majority of the Egyptian people. Throughout the 30 June Revolution, Al-Sisi made the Egyptians not only feel secure but also enabled them to feel victorious in ousting the regime led by Morsi. This sense of achievement made many Egyptians feel emotionally attached to Al-Sisi, and as a result he emerged as the leader of the victorious, yet previously leaderless, masses who for months had longed for his endorsement of their objectives. According to Weber, “recognition of the charismatic leader and devotion to the possessor of the charismatic quality arise out of enthusiasm or despair and hope.” The case of Al-Sisi illustrates the mix of enthusiasm and hope in which the popular enthusiasm for his candidacy has emanated from the widespread hope that he has generated among many sectors within Egyptian society. Also according to Weber, charismatic leaders have tended to emerge in times of national crisis when they have offered hope and solace to their followers. The US political scientist David Martin has highlighted the fact that “charisma requires a willing audience in a conducive situation, perhaps a crisis… All [charismatic leaders] were dependent on a situation and empowered by a crisis. In other words the situational context is of great importance to the emergence of such leaders and to the preparedness of their followers to undergo such a process of developing charisma.” The growing popular identification of Al-Sisi as a saviour has been intensified by the escalating terrorism espoused by the Muslim Brotherhood in its desperate endeavour to coerce the masses that ousted the Morsi regime. No less effective in adding momentum to the build-up of Al-Sisi's popularity has been the hostile attitude of the US towards the 30 June Revolution. This attitude has led to many of Al-Sisi's supporters to argue for the need to develop a common national stand vis-à-vis intrusive US policies in Egypt, as well as against its double standards in dealing with the Egyptians' demand for the ousting of Morsi, an outright US ally. Moreover, the horrific scenes that have been witnessed across the Arab region, particularly in Syria and Libya, have deeply impacted on the perceptions of the Egyptian people who have felt the need to avoid any possibility of such a state of chaos in Egypt. Egyptians have feared that Egypt too may risk the state of anarchy seen in Syria and Libya. For many Egyptians, Al-Sisi symbolises their hopes of eliminating the US-backed Muslim Brotherhood regime and its recipe of anarchy. According to Weber, charismatic leaders are driven by a sense of mission, calling or vocation. Al-Sisi's initial reluctance to stand in the presidential elections needs to be seen within this context. His initial reluctance was reflective of the kind of inner dialogue that is characteristic of many leaders who are undergoing a major transformation in their perception of their respective roles in response to Weber's idea of a calling or duty. Thus far, Al-Sisi has responded positively to the calls of the masses on at least two occasions – on 30 June last year and in his accepting to stand in the presidential elections. In both cases, and specifically in accepting the invitation to stand, he has been left with no other choice but to comply with the masses' will. This pattern of leader-masses interaction is particularly characteristic of charismatic leaders, though it is not the whole story of them. While the challenges ahead are immense, perhaps they are not truely daunting. Charisma may soften popular attitudes towards any unpopular decisions that need to be taken, even if these impact the daily lives of millions of Egyptians who for decades have been denied many basic rights. However, raised popular expectations may be antithetical to the proper management of the root causes of the unfolding crisis that is impacting Egypt's state and society. In such cases, a charismatic leader, while addressing the current scene with its intractable complexities, should strive to sustain his popularity while at the same time maintaining a delicate balance between what should be and what is the best available. In fact, this is also Egypt's dilemma, and not just that of the next president. The writer is a political analyst.
